“We were wrong,” the newspaper said of its past support for requiring a two-thirds vote of each House of the Legislature to raise revenue or close loopholes.

Eyman (seattlepi.com file photo)

“Rather than press reforms, Eyman’s super-majority rule has spurred paralysis,” it added. “Rather than bolster creative solutions to benefit the average taxpayer, the two-third mandate is now one of the apron strings special interests hide behind to avoid paying up.”

The newspaper noted that money from Big Oil — $100,000 from BP, $100,000 from ConocoPhillips, $50,000 from Equilon — has poured into Eyman’s coffers, along with a six-figure donation from the Beer Institute.

“Why do much look from Big Oil and non-Washington booze interests?” asked tTe Herald. “With 1185, it takes a simple majority vote in the Legislature to create a tax loophole, but a two-thirds super-majority to undo it. Not a bad scheme if you’re a deep-pocketed special interest.”

A court challenge to the legality of Initiative 1053, Eyman’s 2010 super-majority initiative — which The Herald supported — is currently before the Washington State Supreme Court. A ruling is expected after the November election.

If the initiative is upheld, The Herald predicts, “As with other states, Washington will get slammed with growing shortfalls and a slow defunding of education.”

“The two-thirds rule sounded like an effective stick to batter lawmakers into not raising taxes. Instead, it became a case study of unintended consequences, of corporations preserving their loopholes while lawmakers gave state universities the O.K. to hike tuition. Washington can do better.”